Compilation and Evaluation of Stream Restoration Projects: Learning from Past Projects to Improve Future Success
Introduction
Over the past two decades, concerns about the degradation of Pennsylvania watersheds have led to a boom in the implementation of stream restoration projects. These projects are most commonly designed to improve instream and riparian habitat, stabilize streambanks, minimize the impact of non-point source pollution and enhance biodiversity. The State of Pennsylvania has been a leader in sponsoring these restoration initiatives through various programs supported by the Department of Environmental Protection, including Growing Greener and Stream Releaf. In addition, federal funds from sources including the United States Department of Agriculture have made it possible for large numbers of riparian buffer projects to be implemented through cooperative programs such as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP). The Pennsylvania CREP program has enrolled thousands of contracts that protect hundreds of thousands of acres in the Susquehanna, Potomac, and more recently the Ohio River basins (FSA fact sheet, 2004).
Given the growing investment in stream restoration efforts, there is an urgent need for tools to assess and improve the effectiveness of restoration efforts at local, state, and nationwide scales (Bernhardt et al. 2005). Increases in funding, education, and awareness relating to water quality issues have led to the growth of infrastructure facilitating the implementation of stream restoration projects. For example, watershed groups are increasingly prevalent and well organized. The private sector has expanded to fill consulting, project design, project construction, and permitting assistance roles. But what is the status of the documentation, evaluation, and scientific study of these projects? On the individual project level, are project objectives clearly defined and then achieved? Is the restoration community making the most of past practices by learning from them to increase future success? On a larger scale, are projects being completed as part of watershed-level implementation strategies to maximize benefits? This study and report represents a response to questions such as these.
